Arizona solar battle, a glimpse of things to come in Colorado?

Across the country utilities are questioning the cost of incentives for rooftop solar. Xcel Energy has just raised the issue in Colorado, but the battle is already in full-swing in Arizona.

The argument that utilities are making is that the incentives and credits homeowners receive — particularly net metering which gives a credit for every kilowatt-hour of electricity a rooftop array puts on the gird — vastly outweigh the benefits to the overall system.

In a filing to the Colorado Public Utilities Commission, Xcel calculated while homeowners with rooftop solar receive 10.5 cents for every kilowatt-hour they put on the grid (equal of the base rate charged to residential customers) they are only providing 4.6 cents of benefits. The solar industry is challenging the study upon which those calculations are based.

Arizona Public Service calculates that its solar rooftop customers are getting $16 for every $3 in value they put into the system.

Xcel hasn’t made a proposal on how it wants to change the net metering credit, saying simply its wants to raise the issue for a full and transparent discussion on costs and benefits.
APS does, however, have a proposal before the Arizona Corporation Commission that would either keep the net metering credit but add a charge for use of the grid or give a credit for solar electricity put on the grid at a reduced rate.

There are already are petitions with about 11,000 signatures to the commission opposing APS’s proposal and more than a 1,000 filings against.

Opponents are now rolling out their on web ads — even one including Barry Goldwater Jr. and a gorilla

And one with less august customers

In California, the state public utilities commission has order an independent study of the costs and benefits of rooftop solar, which is scheduled to be completed this fall.

One thing that APS might to consider is Xcel’s 2009 experience with a proposal to add a grid charge to the bills of customers with solar arrays. It set-off a firestorm of protest and the company withdrew the proposal. David Eves, chief executive officer of Xcel’s Public Service Company of Colorado, describe it as “a train wreck.”

Hmmm. Maybe if I try again in the morning. Completely unintelligible to this reader.

dewey

Yes. That was poorly written

windbourne

LOL;
Arizona utilities is lying when they say that solar is less than .05/KWH worth of utilities. However, nor is solar worth .105/kwh.
The fact is, that solar is worth what it costs the utilities to generate it, and not a penny more. The solar owners should be paid what it costs them.

In addition, this idea of subsidizing solar of older homes is a HORRIBLE idea.
If we really want Solar to be our future, then drop the install subsidies, but leave the net metering going. In addition, require that NEW buildings must have enough on-site AE to equal the buildings HVAC energy. This will encourage new approaches to lowering energy use at home.

Alan

If the power company – whichever one it is – charges, say 10.6 cents/KWH during the same time that I’m putting KWH into the grid, the credit should be that. In effect, I’m not using *any* power from them. Keep in mind that solar installations put power back right when the utilities need it most – during peak hours. That means that it *saves* the companies the cost of adding/buying additional capacity.

These companies don’t know how to compete – they’ve been monopolies since Moses was 3 – and they’re about half as efficient as Congress. They’re greedy, don’t know how to operate with anything that even vaguely resembles efficiency, and their arguments make no sense at all.

Their position reminds me of the line from that Martin Lawrence film: Q: (to Lawrence’s character) Do you actually believe the s**t that’s coming outta your mouth? A: I can’t ever tell until I’m done talkin’.

Short version: If they’re sellin’ it at noon at 10.6 and I put some on the grid at noon, at least offset my prime-time usage by the same amount per KWH! Because that’s exactly what it’s worth then.

cdw

At my residence, I pay around $0.26 per kWh (independent of any taxes, fees, service charges, or assessments) for on-peak electricity in summer. I used about 232 kWh on-peak in June, which amounts to $60.32 (before taxes), over half of the the charge of $110.02 total I paid for all electricity (on-peak and off-peak) before any taxes, assessments, or fees for “Customer account charge”, “Metering”, “Meter Reading”, and “Billing”. (My home is fairly energy efficient.)

Generating my own electricity during on-peak hours would save about $600 anually. Generating ALL my own electricity would save at least $1,300 anually, if completely off-grid. A Lithium-ion (LFI battery) energy storage system might never pay for itself at its current cost, but I would enjoy it anyway.

kell490

What would you do at night? Solar has no answer for that. The utility still has to be there. Utilities aren’t making profits like Apple, and Google. Electric utilities modal is based on the assumption you will use this much electricity a year. If you don’t use it not enough revenue is going to come in to operate the utility.

windbourne

actually, utilities are not supposed to be making large profits, but they are making around 10%. That is massive profits. It used to be 1% above inflation. Now, it is silly amount of money.

kell490

What install subsidy it was dropped to 10 cents for residential and nothing for commercial in 2013 where have you been in AZ. Generation is not the only cost what do you think it takes to get the power from one place to another. With all the new security regulations pushed on the utility from the government they have to spend even more money to protect the grid.

windbourne

kelly, Xcel charges transmission costs separately.
In addition, most solar is used at the local place, or even in the local neighborhood. IOW, the transmission is NOT a big deal.

kell490

Xcel? were talking about Arizona Public Service. Plus what do you do at night everything just shuts down. Why should utility pay a higher prices then it can get from it’s own generator.

Hawkeye

One utility company in California has started to finance solar. They have become the bank . How perfect is that . You arrange your solar with what ever company you want. then apply to them for financing. When approved you make your payment to the electric company. Who can also turn on and off the power if you don’t pay your bill. If you sell your house the new owner takes over. This is such a win, win for every one. To bad Arizona can’t think like that. The utility company gets the interest. The customer gets the solar

cdw

Net metering allows a homeowner to “bank” excess generated electricity, kWh for kWh, on the local substation “grid”, exchanging very expensive, very valuable, “peak demand” electricity for less valuable “off peak” electricity consumed by the homeowner at night.

Under the current Arizona EPR-6 rate, off-peak electricity use is credited first with any excess photovoltaic (PV) generation, then any on-peak electricity use is credited when the off-peak use amount is exhausted.

If a solar-electricity generating homeowner happens to generate more electricity than they consume (on average) over a period of a year, APS then pays them *less* than $0.06 (six cents) for each kWh delivered.

Because residential PV generation is not widespread, electricity generated by solar-system homeowners is consumed entirely within the local substation grid by nearby neighbors and adjacent businesses, up to the first substation voltage regulator, and does not need any long transmission lines, allowing the local utiltity to re-sell this energy at “on-peak” retail rates without any additional cost.

kell490

This doesn’t even make any sense? ” There are already are petitions with about 11,000 signatures to the commission opposing APS’s proposal and more than a 1,000 filings against” 11000 opposing aps and 1000 against it. How about proof reading before you publish ????

David joined The Denver Post in 1999, his second go-round in the Mile High City. Since then he’s covered a variety of topics – from human services to consumer affairs – most always with an investigative bent. Currently he does investigations and banking.